Monday, December 18, 2006

Newt: burden of proof is on presumed terrorists

"One thing that I did take away, though, is a renewed sense that the United States could do itself some good by adopting a routine policy of always being willing to talk. Not only would it give us the moral high ground, but it also reduces the inflated expectations that sometimes cause negotiations to run aground (or worse). If the U.S. had a standard policy of showing up at all tables, foreign powers could hardly misread our intentions in specific cases (such as Iraq) as a show of weakness, and domestic audiences likewise couldn't misread them as a welcome change of heart that promises immediate results. It would just be the United States doing what the United States always does."

FMR. REP. GINGRICH: Well, let’s start with an incident recently in Illinois where the FBI sold hand grenades to a jihadist who wanted to go into a mall at Christmas and blow up himself and as many people as possible. The FBI now reports—and by the way, the local Muslim community thanked the FBI for trapping him, and the ACLU was worried that entrapment was involved. Just take those two standards. The local Muslims who are Americans and patriots and don’t want to be blown up in the mall thought it was terrific to arrest this guy for trying to buy hand grenades, and the ACLU thought there’s probably a real infringement of his legal right to be stupid.

MR. RUSSERT: But (the ACLU are) Americans and patriots as well.

FMR. REP. GINGRICH: Yeah, Americans and patriots as well, but they’re suicidal in my judgment. So second, the, the FBI now reports that this jihadist almost certainly became a jihadist—he’s an American living in Illinois, and he’s getting on the Internet and he’s reading hate and he’s reading recruitment and he’s reading how to be a jihadist. Now, why would you tolerate that? I mean, in a free society that’s trying to survive? You know...

MR. RUSSERT: So close down Web sites.

FMR. REP. GINGRICH: You close down any Web site that is jihadist.

MR. RUSSERT: But who makes that judgment?

FMR. REP. GINGRICH: Look, I—you can appoint three federal judges if you want to and say, “Review this stuff and tell us which ones to close down.” I would just like to have them be federal judges who’ve served in combat.

MR. RUSSERT: Are you concerned, however, that with carte blanche, that the government could move in and say, “This mosque is closed, this Web site is shut down”?

FMR. REP. GINGRICH: No. You have—you have more censorship in the McCain-Feingold bill, which blocks the right of free speech about American campaigns than you have from the FBI closing down jihadists. We’ve already limited the First Amendment right of free speech by a set of rules that are stunningly absurd...

So we’ve had a 30-year period of saying it’s OK to infringe free speech as long as it’s about politics. But now if you want to be a jihadist, and you want to go kill people, well who are we to say that’s morally wrong? I think that’s suicidal. I’m using the word deliberately. A country—a Supreme Court justice once said “The Constitution is not a suicide pact.” This country has every right to defend itself, and you saw the same thing recently on this U.S. Airlines provocation, where you had six people go way out of their way to cause trouble, and then claim they were infringed upon. And I think, frankly, the president should invite that U.S. Airlines crew to the White House and thank them, because we ought to set a standard that if you’re provocative about killing people, we’re not going to show you any mercy.

11 comments:

"If you give me any signal in the age of terrorism that you're a terrorist, I'd say the burden of proof was on you," Gingrich said."

oh, that's it---that's like a fucking invite AFAIC; i'm SO wearing my designated terrorist t-shirt on the plane in jan/feb. i'm gonna leave Hunter in london w/Chris and just take off wearing it and see what happens after i remove my jacket on the plane.

With comments like this, I personally hope that Newt runs and wins the GOP nomination in 08. Let's put this asshole out in the forefront for all of America to see, then see how quickly they vote against him...

One troubling thought Newt reminds me of, though, is my fear of whoever the next president is. Bush's extending of presidential power is bad in and of itself, but the man's a fucking moron and he doesn't know how to really use those new powers. Future presidents will be more intelligent, though. Gingrich is a perfect example of an intelligent candidate how wants to use the powers granted to the executive office during Bush's reign for more dictatorial purposes.

nah, never bothered to take one (i made it in germany right after all of amerika went crazy, egged on by annie jacobson). the t-shirt somehow ended up in London w/Chris...he silk screened another for me, both of which i shall attempt to find this weekend. and send pix!

13 Monsters - yeah, part of me wants the wingnuttiest of GOPpers to win the nomination - but can you imagine if they actually win? urgh.

and i agree with yuor comments about 'presidential powers' - it always struck me that Cheney et al really should have started pulling back on their rush to give the pres new powers when it started to look like they'd lose the WH in 08. I'm not comforted by the implications that they are still full-speed-ahead.

I have a fear of the most wingnutiiest of Americans winning in '08, too. But Newt would be a dream candidate to anyone wanting to hand Republicans their ass because the guy is a complete dickwad and everybody knows it. He's got the charisma of a fucking rock. Bush was able to engineer victories (out of close elections that he essentially lost) because he came off as an everyman (before 2004, at least). Go midwest and down south and the citizens there, no matter what their political affilation was, thought of Bush as a guy they could invite to their backyard BBQ and talk football with. Jus' folk. Newt has none of that; he's just a complete dickwad, which is why I'd love to see him win the GOP nomination in 2008.

An intelligent wingut with the charisma to win, that's something to be afraid of.

i think you're probably correct - newt would almost be the perfect candidate for us - and it's conceivable, via the vagaries of the primaries, that he could win the nomination.

if he did, then he'd get very little of the 'blue/indy' vote that could conceivably go to mccain or giuliani, and he'd get very little of the jeebus-vote that could arguably go to whoever the jeebus-candidate might be (brownback e.g.)